A goofy question about "Catholic guilt"

[thevickinator16]

Hello!

Your question about Catholic guilt made me think to an article I read this week. It was St Catherine of Geona’s Treatise on Purgatory. She mentioned several times about the guilt of sin being no more once you entered purgatory. That purgatory dealt with just the stains left over from the sins, which are to be purified before we can see God. I wonder if this was the same guilt referred to?

By the way I am not sure what St Catherine meant by that. I was just happy to find that purgatory is not exactly as bad as I thought!

God Bless!

 

[Dtmccameron]

Hello!
I was just happy to find that purgatory is not exactly as bad as I thought!

God Bless!

How *bad *exactly did you think it was?

And, ah, is? Way I understood it, being purged of your sins isn’t an especially pleasant exerience!

 

[Among_Strangers]

Dtmccameron:

A, uh, DVD? … Um…ah…I’m afraid I don’t quite get the phrase…Sorry.

That’s OK, the person to whom I was speaking to gets it

 

[Among_Strangers]

I’m not implying there is anything wrong with guilt, Catholic or otherwise. My original question was, why do Catholics themselves joke about “Catholic guilt”?

Maybe it’s a coping mechanism?

I say it sometimes to take the edge off in my office setting. If things are getting too intense and I am asking too many questions I laugh and say, “Oh sorry; my Catholic guilt is showing”

 

[srferdave]

I’m not implying there is anything wrong with guilt, Catholic or otherwise. My original question was, why do Catholics themselves joke about “Catholic guilt”?

Because sometimes it is important to make light of situations. Not everything has to be so serious. As long as what you are joking around with is not disrespectful. But joking about Catholic guilt is not disrespectful, so it can be fun.

 

[whatevergirl]

So, I take it that beating ourselves up before going to the confessional is a-okay, then, eh?

***No…I didn’t think I had to state that though. ***

If you ask me, she might be listening a bit too well, as I doub’t she came up with that on her own!

LOL–Ya think?

 

[thevickinator16]

How *bad *exactly did you think it was?

And, ah, is? Way I understood it, being purged of your sins isn’t an especially pleasant exerience!

St Catherine describes 15 aspects of Purgatory. In each she explains what happens to the soul as it is purified for entrance into Heaven. She like several other Saints, went through this here on earth. She talks about the sould wanting to cast itself in the fires of Hell before it would see God with stains on itself. She also said that there was joy in Purgatory. The joy is as they become purified, the souls see more of the light of God and know they are getting closer to being with Him. Yes there is pain also, this is the stains of sin being burnt away. She makes an example using gold. Everytime you heat up gold, it takes more impurities out of it. Finally you are left with PURE gold. She likened this to the soul being purified. If the soul were to see God in all His Onipotence, with stain still left, he would surely crisp under this pure love.

the web site link if you are interested in reading this treatise is:

www.catholictreasury.info/books/treatise_on_purgatory/

God Bless!

 

[whatevergirl]

I would be interested to hear that developed, as that is essentially what I grew up in. But the Italian side in my family was Alpine Italian, so maybe that’s different.

I will say that there were significant differences in the idea of what was sinful and what was not; more the emphasis, really. In my family, the Irish considered drunkenness and fighting and virtually savage “dirty tricks” just “good, clean fun”, even among family, but were deadly when it came to any kind of impurity. Children were fed guilt with their breakfasts, and were expected to “tow the line”, particularly by the elderly. The elderly were also the “tellers of stories” and were massively respected by children and adults alike. Religion was mystical, majestic and mysterious. Salvation was kind of considered a tough accomplishment, if not an unlikely outcome. They held themselves to very high standards (drunkenness and conflict notwithstanding) Sin was an almost intolerable burden on the conscience until confessed, and guilt tended to linger even beyond that.

The Italians were very much into a sort of “tolerant order”. Drunkenness was simply unheard of and baffling. Fighting and “dirty tricks” were considered totally impermissable. Family harmony was extremely important. Purity was important, but it was understood that, among the unmarried, lapses were just part of life and were, after all, simply a manifestation of oncoming fecundity. Children were adored, and grandparents were virtually “co-conspirators” with children in getting around parents’ rules. But a grandparent’s reproach to a child stung hard until “undone” by “Now that’s over, and you’ll be good now.” Religion was part of everyday, like eating, and there was a sort of underlying assumption that Jesus or Mary would pull one’s chestnuts out of the fire in the end, almost no matter what. Sinfulness in general was sort of assumed, whether or not for good reason, and was borne lightly on the mind notwithstanding a strong understanding that it had to be offloaded in the confessional. That offloading was complete; slate clean.

But again, those were Alpine Italians, and they might have been different from southern Italians when it came to religion and sin. I am aware they are different in other ways.

I will say, too, that there were differences among the Irish. Those from the English-speaking “Pale” were more easygoing than those from the Gaelic-speaking West; the latter, in my family at least, being warriors and heroes in every way.

***LOL–“pull one’s chestnuts out from the fire…at the end…”

Yep, I’d say we had similiar Italian upbringings. ***

 

[cymonk]

When you refer to “scrupulosity” are you talking about people who worry about every little thing they do as being sinful? I know someone who thinks she needs to go to confession for telling a telemarketer her husband is not “in” when he’s sitting right there. I’m assuming this would be an example? Sorry but this is a whole new language for me!

I have two thoughts on where the ‘catholic guilt’ phase comes from… First, in my own experiences… as I have grown in my faith and started going to confession on a more regular basis, my conscience has become more aware of my sins. Not only to things I am doing wrong and but also to things I feel called to be doing, and am not. This is something that contributes to the “catholic guilt” concept.

Secondly… When I used to attend a lot of nondenominational evangelical churches, there is a huge difference in their “guilt” as they get it in small doses. On the surface, there didn’t seem to be a lot of the “Established Right and Wrong”. Everyone believed as they saw fit. That allowed people to come into their own convictions as they grew. “Little bits of guilt” as they go…

With the Catholic Church, there are many guidelines of ‘truth’ that are already established and have been for thousands of years. These guidelines are sort of ‘dumped’ on a conscience in bigger doses. Many of the guidelines with ‘overhang your conscience’ from the beginning… leaving many in a regular state of ‘guilt’ as you grow.

 

[cymonk]

the ‘catholic guilt’ phase

Whoops… wrote that in a hurry and didn’t proofread well… phase = phrase.

 

[cymonk]

I have two thoughts on where the ‘catholic guilt’ phrase comes from… First, in my own experiences… as I have grown in my faith and started going to confession on a more regular basis, my conscience has become more aware of my sins. Not only to things I am doing wrong and but also to things I feel called to be doing, and am not. This is something that contributes to the “catholic guilt” concept.

Secondly… When I used to attend a lot of nondenominational evangelical churches, there is a huge difference in their “guilt” as they get it in small doses. On the surface, there didn’t seem to be a lot of the “Established Right and Wrong”. Everyone believed as they saw fit. That allowed people to come into their own convictions as they grew. “Little bits of guilt” as they go…

With the Catholic Church, there are many guidelines of ‘truth’ that are already established and have been for thousands of years. These guidelines are sort of ‘dumped’ on a conscience in bigger doses. Many of the guidelines with ‘overhang your conscience’ from the beginning… leaving many in a regular state of ‘guilt’ as you grow.

 

[Matt33]

Keep in mind here that I’m a 2009 convert! I often hear Catholics joke about “Catholic guilt.” Where do you think this comes from? Are Catholics plagued with guilt more than other people or what? This is a stupid question but I always wonder where those jokes come from when I hear them. Debbie

I think it is a combination of a few things. 1. I think that Catholics are more likely to have guilt because we differ from eveangelical protestants in that we rely on Works and Faith. for our salvation… bottom line, works mean something, good and bad. We are all sinners and we are judged for our actions as well as our faith. Evangelicals don’t have that, they believe that your are saved by faith alone. 2. I think it also comes form the Church not falling to the idea of relativism. There is good and bad, and you do good and bad. The Church and (hopefully) Catholic parents teaches us these things uncompromised.

As for why we have jokes about it… wel it is a phenomena that is different from normal phenomena. So we joke about it when we see it. Like Italians joke about thier stuff, rednecks about thiers and so on. Jews also have “Jewish guilt” Funney how you never hear jokes about athiest guilt Bottom line is welcome to the family, pass the potatoes and bond with us and laugh with us over the things that bring us together.

 

[BiologyBrain]

I joke about my ‘Catholic guilt’ b/c my co-workers (non-Catholic) bring it up. Its easier to joke it off than to try to sit down & explain things. Something else is that - at least to my co-workers opinion - I have a need to confess my transgressions, both in Church & at work. Therefore, when I tell someone I did so & so to them, they say its my Catholic guilt getting the better of me & making me confess my wrong-doing.

Plus there’s no quicker way to open peoples minds than to tolerate & use a good joke to show your faith IMO.

 

[Ridgerunner]

***LOL–“pull one’s chestnuts out from the fire…at the end…”

Yep, I’d say we had similiar Italian upbringings. ***

Actually, mine was mixed Irish/Italian, which, in itself, is enough to make one schizoid. Just curious, were yours northern or southern Italians?

 

[Ridgerunner]

I have two thoughts on where the ‘catholic guilt’ phrase comes from… First, in my own experiences… as I have grown in my faith and started going to confession on a more regular basis, my conscience has become more aware of my sins. Not only to things I am doing wrong and but also to things I feel called to be doing, and am not. This is something that contributes to the “catholic guilt” concept.

Secondly… When I used to attend a lot of nondenominational evangelical churches, there is a huge difference in their “guilt” as they get it in small doses. On the surface, there didn’t seem to be a lot of the “Established Right and Wrong”. Everyone believed as they saw fit. That allowed people to come into their own convictions as they grew. “Little bits of guilt” as they go…

With the Catholic Church, there are many guidelines of ‘truth’ that are already established and have been for thousands of years. These guidelines are sort of ‘dumped’ on a conscience in bigger doses. Many of the guidelines with ‘overhang your conscience’ from the beginning… leaving many in a regular state of ‘guilt’ as you grow.

I’m not sure this will be of any interest to the OP, but here it is.

I think it’s more than “guilt” exactly. I think it’s more a part of a way of thinking and not thinking. I remember one time talking to (of all people) a judge, about a man who was charged with molesting a “16-going-on-thirty” year old. Anyway, the judge did what he had to do in the case, but asked me “Honestly, now, don’t you sometimes feel lustful toward someone who is underage, if she’s a knockout?”

“No”, I replied, honestly. He acted surprised, almost offended, and asked me why I could be so sure of that.

I found myself saying (I sometimes am surprised at what comes out of my own mouth) “Because I was raised Catholic, and as a Catholic you’re more or less trained to cut certain thoughts off so quickly you get to where it becomes second nature, and you often aren’t even really quite aware that you did.”

I was afraid I had perhaps really offended the judge, who was a protestant and who, after all, had admitted to a moral failing himself, but found that I didn’t. But neither did he understand what I was talking about at all. Not at all.

I think “Catholic guilt” is a bit like that. After awhile, we just develop a kind of “interior radar” for some evil thing that isn’t quite expunged. We just know it’s there, and, knowing it, never really give ourselves credit for “being a good person” in the bland sort of self-congratulatory way so many do. In my thinking, “Catholic guilt” is more a sort of moral clarity that we get from having definite non-relativistic moral precepts, and being obliged to scan ourselves for lapses. It’s “knowing” more than it is “guilt”.

 

[whatevergirl]

Actually, mine was mixed Irish/Italian, which, in itself, is enough to make one schizoid. Just curious, were yours northern or southern Italians?

My dad and his family were southern Italy, mainly. My mom’s family was from ireland and scotland, actually…

 

[convert999]

Cymonk, what you said about having morality rules in place for thousands of years really struck a chord with me. Since I am from an evangelical backround, I know what you mean by getting “rules” in small doses at a time. Everyone sort of develops their own rules as they go. By the time I decided to convert, my “inner rules” were pretty much the same as Catholicism, so there was no “guilt overload.” Actually I feel much less guilt as a Catholic than as an Evangelical simply because of Reconciliation. Plus, it’s a real relief not to have to figure out the rules as I go!

BTW, the Irish/Italian thing is interesting. My Irish family is. violently opposed to alcohol in any form. My husband’s Italian family never gets a security deposit back after a wedding reception. Our wedding reception consisted mostly of my horrified family watching my husband’s relatives dancing on tabletops in their bare feet. Both sides are still talking about it!

 

[Ridgerunner]

Cymonk, what you said about having morality rules in place for thousands of years really struck a chord with me. Since I am from an evangelical backround, I know what you mean by getting “rules” in small doses at a time. Everyone sort of develops their own rules as they go. By the time I decided to convert, my “inner rules” were pretty much the same as Catholicism, so there was no “guilt overload.” Actually I feel much less guilt as a Catholic than as an Evangelical simply because of Reconciliation. Plus, it’s a real relief not to have to figure out the rules as I go!

BTW, the Irish/Italian thing is interesting. My Irish family is. violently opposed to alcohol in any form. My husband’s Italian family never gets a security deposit back after a wedding reception. Our wedding reception consisted mostly of my horrified family watching my husband’s relatives dancing on tabletops in their bare feet. Both sides are still talking about it!

The following is a trifle off topic, but my “Catholic guilt” allows it anyway.
There are different kinds of Irish. If your forbears were Irish protestants, I am not surprised that they eschewed alcohol. Even in southern Ireland, there are different kinds of Irish, or were.

I’m guessing that your husband’s family is not Alpine Italian; a more staid type. I am told that the Southern Italians sometimes refer to Alpines as “those Germans”. They’re not Germans, really, and are not really like even “Mediterranean Germans” (those within the old boundaries of the Roman Empire, like Rhinelanders and Bavarians) But they do bear some comparison, and I can understand why southern Italians say it.

Your comments are funny to me, because my Irish forbears were a thousand times more likely to get drunk at a wedding than my Italian ones ever were. There are differences, as I said, among those groups, and I have always been interested in those differences.

Now Germans…

 

[convert999]

OH NO! My daughter is dating a German boy! What would their wedding be like, with his German family, my Irish tee-totallers, and my excessively “happy” in-laws?

 

[Ridgerunner]

While I’m at it (and I will need to leave after this) I will comment on one observation I have made, or think I have made.

I grew up in the Bible Belt, in which the majority of Protestants are fundamentalists or the next thing to it. Even as a kid, I felt sorry for them because of the way they deal with guilt. It’s like an on/off switch. You’re either “hell-bound” or you’re “saved”. There no place in between with many of them. I have always thought of that as being a bit inhuman, because humans fall all the time.

So, you see people get all “saved” (usually at a revival or in the face of some shattering event). But human nature being what it is, they would “fall”. Now, if that’s the case, you don’t have a lot of choices. You can deny that you fell, you can doubt your state of being “saved”, or you can persuade yourself that “once saved always saved”, so that you’re saved no matter what you do. I have seen people get “saved” over and over again. It isn’t so much that they doubt you can be “saved”, it’s that they become doubtful that they really were “saved” if their actions really go into the toilet.

In any event, being “saved” is an emotional thing, and is expected to be. That’s why so many of their preachers and churches have these dramatic “signals”; being “slain in the spirit”, getting the “gift of tongues” and so forth. It has always seemed a traumatic thing to me, but also something else. It’s as if they’re trying to find a “sacrament” of forgiveness, of whose efficacy they can be sure, but never really quite do.

We, of course, have a sacrament of whose efficacy we are sure. And we can be in any emotional state, even perhaps boredom, and we can still be sure of it. We do form “firm purposes of amendment” but we don’t expect ourselves never to fall again. We don’t doubt our “saved” and have to go through some emotional crisis in order to be reassured of it.

As I said, I think “Catholic guilt” is much more human. It’s akin to “knowing the truth”, and I think we talk about it precisely because if our consciences are reasonably well formed and we avail ourselves of the sacraments, we’re not so terribly afraid to admit the truth.